I understand your sentiment. This is a game made in jest. It's not perfect and it has limitations. The purpose is to have fun, not replace careful analysis of o

I understand your sentiment. This is a game made in jest. It's not perfect and it has limitations. The purpose is to have fun, not replace careful analysis of our political leadership. But, I do think it can aid that endeavor. McConnell is at the top of the leader board because he is Senate Majority Leader and that requires him to be very active on the Senate floor. His job is not only to represent the interest of his constituents, but to do right by his party, and also set the daily agenda for the Senate and run the floor proceedings (more info: https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing/Majority_Minority_Leaders.htm https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/briefing...). Regarding your sentiment against the use of gamification: I agree with you that we should measure our political leaders by their ability to serve the interests of their constituents, and the things they are doing to make the city/state/country better. But if you're not paying attention, that's hard to do. Things change so fast, people employ strategies to hide the true nature of their actions, discourse around politics often feels toxic and there's a million different news sources saying contradictory things, not to mention literal fake news that spreads like wild fire. Gamification is a way to intrinsically motivate people to pay attention. Because with out a little push, most people won't. Additionally, I'm only using primary sources (data.gov and the GPO's api) as a means to cut through the noise. It's definitely a work in progress. And you might still disagree with me about any benefits, which is fine. I've had a few teachers use in the classroom though and they said it made a big impact on their students.